U.S. Military’s Role in Climate Change

September 16, 2024 – Washington, D.C.

The role of the U.S. military in contributing to climate change is gaining increased attention, though it remains underreported in mainstream media. According to environmental experts, the U.S. military is one of the largest institutional polluters on the planet, with a carbon footprint larger than most medium-sized countries. Its vast consumption of liquid fuels and extensive global operations have led to significant carbon emissions, a fact that often goes overlooked despite its far-reaching implications.

Massive Carbon Footprint from Military Operations

The U.S. military is responsible for consuming around 100 million barrels of oil annually, making it the world's largest institutional consumer of petroleum. This fuel powers everything from fighter jets and warships to ground vehicles and backup power generators for its global network of military bases. According to a 2019 study published by Brown University’s Costs of War project, if the U.S. military were a country, its fuel consumption would place it among the top 50 greenhouse gas emitters in the world ​(Inlander).

A substantial portion of these emissions comes from the military’s overseas operations. For example, during the Iraq War, U.S. military operations burned more than 1.2 million barrels of oil each month. The environmental toll of these operations is significant, but they are often overlooked when discussing climate policy because military emissions are typically excluded from international climate agreements, such as the Paris Agreement.

Environmental Impact of U.S. Military Bases

In addition to fuel consumption, the environmental impact of maintaining over 800 military bases around the world is immense. These installations, spread across 70 countries, not only contribute to local pollution but also generate massive amounts of waste, including toxic chemicals and hazardous materials. One of the most concerning substances linked to military pollution is PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), often referred to as “forever chemicals.” These chemicals are used in firefighting foams on military bases and have been found to contaminate local water supplies in several regions.

Studies have found elevated levels of PFAS in the groundwater near many U.S. military installations, both domestically and abroad, leading to public health concerns and further compounding the military's environmental impact​ (Ground News).

Lack of Public Scrutiny and Media Coverage

Despite the U.S. military's significant role in contributing to global climate change, its environmental impact receives minimal media attention. Most discussions around climate change focus on civilian sectors, such as transportation and industry, while largely ignoring the outsized role played by military operations. The lack of transparency surrounding military emissions further complicates efforts to hold the institution accountable.

Additionally, the U.S. Department of Defense has been reluctant to disclose the full extent of its carbon emissions. Many environmental advocates argue that greater transparency and accountability are needed to include military emissions in global climate targets. Without addressing the environmental toll of the military, achieving meaningful reductions in carbon emissions will remain a challenge​

(Inlander)​ (Ground News).

Calls for Change and Sustainable Military Practices

As global temperatures continue to rise, some military leaders and policymakers are beginning to acknowledge the need for the armed forces to reduce their environmental footprint. The U.S. Department of Defense has recently initiated projects aimed at improving energy efficiency on military bases and increasing the use of renewable energy. In particular, efforts to install solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage at various bases have been seen as steps in the right direction.

However, critics argue that these measures are not enough. They point out that while these projects may reduce the environmental impact of domestic military bases, they do little to address the massive fuel consumption required for the U.S. military's global operations.

Environmental organizations are calling for a more comprehensive approach, including the inclusion of military emissions in climate agreements and more aggressive efforts to transition the military away from fossil fuels. Many see this as a critical step in reducing the U.S.'s overall contribution to global carbon emissions​ (Inlander).

Conclusion

The U.S. military’s environmental impact is a pressing issue that demands greater attention from policymakers, media, and the public. As one of the largest consumers of liquid fuel globally, the military's carbon emissions contribute significantly to climate change. While some steps are being taken to reduce its environmental footprint, much more needs to be done to address the full scope of its impact. Without greater transparency and accountability, the military’s contribution to global warming will continue to go largely unnoticed, hindering global efforts to combat the climate crisis.